This article was first published in the State of Faith newsletter. Sign up to receive the newsletter in your inbox each Monday night.
A sanctuary and a refuge is what church is supposed to feel like. At its best, a house of worship is a place where a stranger is welcome without judgement or suspicion, where believers can feel physically and emotionally safe.
But what happens when a place meant for solace and communion with God becomes a source of tension and fear?
On Sunday, two women were shot and killed on the property of Richmond Road Baptist Church in Lexington, Kentucky. Three others, including the pastor of the church, were injured. The suspect, a 47-year-old man, was allegedly looking for the mother of his children, who was not at the church. Instead, he fatally shot her mother and sister, Lexington Herald Leader reported. Police shot the suspect at the scene.
The tragedy has left the congregation reeling and upended their sense of safety.
Sadly, such violence is no longer rare.
In 2015, a white supremacist opened fire during Bible study at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina, murdering nine Black worshippers. In 2018, a gunman killed 11 people at Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, the deadliest attack on Jews in U.S. history. Since then, threats to religious spaces have continued to rise across the country.
When I was reporting this story, Rabbi Sam Spector of Kol Ami synagogue in Salt Lake City told me his congregation began receiving bomb threats and has since spent thousands of dollars on new security systems and guards. These days, he said, it’s not unusual to see security outside the synagogue.
More recently, churches have been vulnerable in new ways. In early 2025, the Department of Homeland Security rescinded protections against ICE arrests in churches and other “sensitive locations.” As a result, in Los Angeles, faith leaders armed parishioners with walkie-talkies and “pink binders” that outline step-by-step ICE response plans. Two Catholic dioceses in California have excused parishioners fearing immigration enforcement from attending Mass.
In light of these tensions, some houses of worship are starting to feel a little like fortresses or embattled outposts in a larger cultural and political battlefield.
And at a time when religious life in America is already fragile, shaken by declining church attendance and institutional mistrust, the fear of physical harm can become yet another barrier to feeling spiritually safe and connected.
After all, genuine transformative worship demands a posture of openness and letting down defenses. And when entire groups feel unsafe in religious settings, the broader promise of religious freedom and pluralism begins to fracture.
Still, across the country, many faith communities are rising to meet these challenges by hiring security, improving emergency preparedness and training leaders to recognize signs of danger.
Maybe these challenges present a opportunity to reimagine what sanctuary means today and how a house of worship can remain a place of radical welcome and inclusion to all, while also protecting those who are seeking refuge within it.
Fresh off the press:
Two weeks after the Supreme Court sided with parents seeking to opt their children out of class discussions on LGBTQ-themed books, I spoke with the families involved in the case about their reaction to the ruling and how they hope to move forward as a new school year approaches.
California Bishop allows those in fear of immigration raids to avoid Mass.
Ryan Burge reflects on the closing of the church he led. And he’s still not over it.
Term of the week: The Johnson Amendment
The Johnson Amendment, introduced in 1954 by then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson, is a provision in the U.S. tax code that prohibits tax-exempt organizations, including churches, from endorsing or opposing political candidates. While the law remains intact, the recent IRS court filing is challenging this long-standing policy.
The goal of the amendment was to maintain a clear boundary between partisan politics and nonprofit work, especially in religious and charitable settings. Under this law, organizations that wish to retain their tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) must refrain from direct or indirect involvement in political campaigns.
Supporters of the Johnson Amendment argue that it protects houses of worship and nonprofits from being politicized or pressured into partisan activity, preserving their independence and integrity. Critics, however, claim the amendment limits free speech and religious liberty, particularly for clergy who wish to speak out on political issues.
Only one known church has ever lost its tax-exempt status for violating the Johnson Amendment — a congregation in Binghamton, New York, which ran full-page newspaper ads opposing Bill Clinton during the 1992 presidential campaign, according to the Conversation.
What I’m reading and listening to:
What are the implications of the recent filing by the IRS? This thoughtful explainer explores the recent policy shift.
This interview between Ezra Klein and Kyla Scanlon, a content creator who is also a member of Gen Z, offers an insightful glimpse about the attention economy and how the younger generations think about the future. At the end, Scanlon recommends “The Screwtape Letters” by C.S. Lewis to the New York Times readers, which she described as “the best book.” She pointed out how stagnation can be a form of destruction: “If you do have people who are numb to the world around them, it becomes difficult for them to push back.”
Odds and Ends:
Over the weekend, I heard a quote that has lingered in my mind since. It’s by Eckhart Tolle, a German-born author and spiritual teacher, and the words come from Tolle’s 2005 book “A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life’s Purpose.”
“There is only one perpetrator of evil on the planet: human unconsciousness. That realization is true forgiveness. With forgiveness, your victim identity dissolves, and your true power emerges — the power of presence. Instead of blaming the darkness, you bring in the light.”